Neither Galway nor the Vancouver Police Department (VPD) immediately responded to Ars’ request for comment. However, Galway did post this video on YouTube:

Sgt. Randy Fincham of the VPD told the Vancouver Sun that police have received 13 drone-related complaints this year—10 of those since May 2014. Galway’s incident was the most recent: he was having dinner on the patio of his condo when he spotted the drone at around 8:30pm and then again two hours later.

Like the United States, Canada does allow drones to fly without any official authorization so long as they are for recreational or leisure purposes.

However, Fincham also told the Sun that a drone operator could face prosecution on voyeurism charges if that drone was shown to have been recording someone who “is in circumstances that give rise to a reasonable expectation of privacy.”

We have filed a public records request with the VPD and inquired with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and Transport Canada to find out more about such reported drone-related incidents. In July 2014 those agencies also told the Sun that they were investigating a video of a drone that was flying too close to aircraft at the Vancouver International Airport.

UPDATE 5:26pm CT: Fincham wrote to Ars, saying that eight of the 10 most recent drone complaints "were in relation to privacy concerns."

"The VPD would become involved in an investigation into the use of a drone if it should constitute a criminal offence, possibly the use a 'drone' or other high-tech device to view or film a person who was within the confines of their private dwelling or negligently cause damage to property or personal injury," he said by e-mail.

Fincham noted that no charges have ever been brought against drone operators in Vancouver and that his department does not use drones.

However, Fincham also told the Sun that a drone operator could face prosecution on voyeurism charges if that drone was shown to have been recording someone who “is in circumstances that give rise to a reasonable expectation of privacy.”

Ah, the good old days when we use to observe others through binoculars or a telescope. None of this fancy "drones".

I like drones. I think they're cool as hell. I have a friend that has more than one and that's great.

If a drone equipped with a camera comes anywhere near one of my windows, I will do whatever i am able in the given scenario to disable the unit and drag its parts into my garage. At that point I'll decide whether to buy a new remote and enjoy my new drone or put its busted ass up on craigslist. Either way, the former owner will be short one drone.

Could we please stop calling these 'Drones'... That's a quadcopter, not a drone.

Actually DJI V2+ is a drone, with autonomous flight an all

-proud owner here

I've been reading about tri/quad/hex/octo/etc copters for years- what differentiates one of those from a "drone"?

Also, why now of all years has this suddenly become the center of media attention? They [remote flying devices] aren't exactly new tech.

They're easier to get and easier to use than in previous years, cheaper, and lower-end units have much higher capabilities than even a few years back (longer range, more and easier to implement autonomy, remote video, extensive video recording, and so on).

Still waiting for the stories like this that end with:"And so I shot it"

It sounds like this drone could have been involved in an illegal activity.

It is important to balance the right to privacy and the right to fly a drone in a public place.

Anti-drone rifle or shotgun?

I don't know why people keep suggesting shooting the drone down; wildly discharging firearms into the air isn't a good idea (illegal where I am), let alone what would happen to anyone below if you did hit the drone.

A canon that launches a net and reels in the drone before it swings down and whacks anything should do the trick. Or a good old fashion harpoon and rope (I kid, I kid).

This has the added benefit of forcing the operator to come see you to get his/her drone back. You can more easily pursue legal action with the confirmed identity of the operator.